Hospitals v. New York Hotel Trades Council And Hotel Association Of New York…
NYU Langone Hospitals v. New York Hotel Trades Council And Hotel Association Of New York City, Inc. Health Benefits Fund
- Vyskocil
- 1:20-cv-09091
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
NYU Langone Hospitals v. New York Hotel Trades Council Health Benefits Fund: Judge Vyskocil discontinued the settled case, subject to a restoration deadline.
NYU Langone Hospitals and the New York Hotel Trades Council and Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Health Benefits Fund; the action could be restored by February 4, 2021, but would be dismissed with prejudice if no extension was requested.
What happened
NYU Langone Hospitals v. New York Hotel Trades Council and Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Health Benefits Fund is a case in which the parties told the court they had reached a settlement in principle.
The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar by February 4, 2021. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or settlement terms.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil stated that the court would extend the deadline only if no settlement agreement had been signed. If neither party sought an extension, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Hospitals v. New York Hotel Trades Council And Hotel Association Of New York… · No. 1:20-cv-09091
- Vyskocil
- Jan. 4, 2021
Background
The parties informed the court by letter that they had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not identify the claims underlying the case or provide the proposed settlement’s terms.
Court’s Order
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if an application to restore it was made by February 4, 2021. “Without prejudice” in this context meant that the action could be restored during that period.
The court stated that it would extend the restoration deadline only if no settlement agreement had yet been executed. It also stated that it would not retain jurisdiction over the case if the parties had a binding settlement agreement, regardless of the status of payments under that agreement. If neither party applied to extend the deadline, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
Disposition
The court entered an order of dismissal discontinuing the action under those conditions. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil did not decide the merits of the parties’ underlying dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.